Jane Eyre (1996)

No Passion.

The film was very pretty, and a more accurate adaptation that I've seen previously, but, unfortunately, it lacks a key part of the book: passion. There is absolutely no tension between Jane and Rochester in this version, though from a technical standpoint they both play the parts decently. I love the book, have read it multiple times, but by the end of this film I didn't really care whether they got back together or not, so lacking in passion and tension it was. December 31, 2008

Jane Eyre and William Hurt

I have to admit that I have been a Mr. Rochester/Jane Eyre fan since I was a teenager. I have read the book for school and many times over since then and still go back to it. When I found William Hurt playing Mr. Rochester, that just added all the spice I needed to enjoy this lovely book/movie.

Jane Eyre is a poor, helpless child who is mistreated and deceived and sent to a home for girls. She grows up to be a governess and falls in love with her employer. On her wedding day she finds out that he is married and she leaves him without preamble. She returns to be by his side in the end and understands his story.

Everyone has a story even the people we think are high and mighty and untouchable. This is a never ending love story for women everywhere. The book is a must too. December 22, 2008

Totally disappointing.

(Spoiler alert) I recently read "Jane Eyre" and was very excited about watching the several film adaptations of this most wonderful book. I am very disappointed with this version of the film (Hurt & Gainesbourg), so much so that I have not yet tried to watch any of the others. Having read the book so near to the time that I watched the film, I was aghast that so much of the story was ignored! Jane's time spent between leaving Thornfield and going back to Mr. Rochester was COMPLETELY skipped over. Much of her childhood was likewise left out. The cruelty that Jane experienced at the hands of her aunt and cousins was only briefly touched upon, and hardly any attention was given to the relationships she cultivated at Lowood School. Perhaps most diappointing, the relationship between Jane and Mr. Rochester was hardly developed at all. There were no moments when the viewer felt an unspoken yearning or tension between them that would foreshadow their union. There was simply nothing going on between the two characters that would hint at love or interest in each other, making the proposal scene (a very beautiful scene in the book!) very, very lackluster. Furthermore, the actors, in my opinion, did not truly portray the characters as they were written. While young Anna Paquin is quite talented, I don't feel that she gave the best portrayal of young Jane (this is probably the fault of those who counseled the actress), because she portrayed Jane as insolent, sullen, and mouthy. The child Jane in the book is none of those things. Charlotte Gainesbourg gave a fair performance as the adult Jane. But, as much as I admire William Hurt's performances in his countless other roles, he was simply NOT Mr. Rochester. Hurt displayed none of the dark brooding and sharp wit that the Mr. Rochester in the book displayed. This adaptation is very disappointing, and I would urge those who love the story to choose another means in which to waste 2 hours. December 3, 2008

Jane Eyer

I loved the service. I ordered it and got what I expected. It came quickly and was in perfect shape! October 24, 2008

My least favorite adaptation of the movie

I'm a huge Jane Eyre fan (both written and film/TV) so I was very excited to see this version. William Hurt is a terrific actor and I've enjoyed his other work, so I looked forward to his portrayal of Rochester.

I enjoyed the adaptation until halfway into the movie. Then everything went horribly wrong - Jane leaves right after the failed wedding to go to Gateshead? The Rivers family (minus one sister, I forget if it's Diana or Mary) live at Gateshead? She met St. John when her Aunt Reed died? Why take huge liberties with the storyline that are completely untrue to the story? I'm not a Jane Eyre purist, but the William Hurt/Charlotte Gainsbourg version was just as awful as the Ciaran Hinds/Samantha Morton version.

Bottom line:

1) If you've never read Jane Eyre, I would NOT recommend seeing this version before you read the book. Actually I wouldn't recommend this version on any level.

2) If you've never seen a film/TV adaptation of Jane Eyre, I'd recommend starting with the Timothy Dalton/Zelah Clarke version first and move on to the Toby Stephens/Ruth Wilson version afterward. The TD/ZC version is 6 hours and does a fantastic job of keeping the integrity of the novel in tact. The TS/RW is 4 hours, takes a few liberties with the novel, but the two leads' performances are absolutely electric and this version is very well done. Enjoy! October 19, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...